Thursday, June 04, 2009


Yglesias reports:
The House Republican leadership upped the ante Thursday in the ongoing debate over the size and scope of the federal budget, unveiling a proposal to cut spending by $375 billion over the next five years.
Then comments:
It turns out, however, that there’s no real proposal here. Instead, “The bulk of the GOP’s proposed savings would come from capping non-defense discretionary spending at the level of inflation.”

A blanket cap in spending is not a good idea. For one thing, it’s incredibly indiscriminate. For another thing, it’s oddly un-inclusive. If we’re just going to reduce outlays in an arbitrary, across-the-board way, why should defense and Social Security and Medicare and Medicaid be left off the table?
Why is Social Security part of any discussion about the federal budget? It has it's own revenue stream, it's own savings (special treasury bonds), and it's own payment trajectory - at least until 2041 or so.


Post a Comment